It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

80% carbon dioxide emissions reduction by 2050 means 80% depopulation

page: 1
10
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 6 2016 @ 02:49 PM
link   
Everybody was so happy in Paris, a majority of countries ratified the carbon dioxide treaty, they were all there Obama, Al Gore all political leaders. 80% reduction by 2050 is the target, no more than 2 degrees Celsius average global temperature raise, thats the target, but SHELL says in its energy scenario until 2050 coal, oil, gas usage all the same, increasing energy demand compensated by wind, biomass, solar cells. so 80% emissions reduction not feasible, unless we do 80% depopulation


ec.europa.eu...




posted on Sep, 6 2016 @ 02:53 PM
link   
a reply to: galien8

They aim to reduce emissions by 80% by 2050, based on the 1990 levels (not present day)



The roadmap suggests that, by 2050, the EU should cut its emissions to 80% below 1990 levels

edit on 6-9-2016 by FamCore because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 6 2016 @ 02:53 PM
link   
a reply to: galien8

Where does it point to "80% depopulation"? I see 80% in reference to cut downs, but nothing about depopulation.



posted on Sep, 6 2016 @ 02:54 PM
link   
a reply to: galien8

Welcome to "the consensus". Seriously, these modern day Malthusians really do want to cull.



posted on Sep, 6 2016 @ 02:56 PM
link   
This planet is definitely large enough to withstand current numbers.

But I don't think the ideologies prevalent in the modern world are capable of withstanding the current numbers.

Not even my beloved socialism is up to task.
edit on 6-9-2016 by Hazardous1408 because: Because I did.



posted on Sep, 6 2016 @ 03:21 PM
link   
a reply to: greencmp

No we don't, that is yalls strawman.
You create that ridiculous argument and then act like anyone who thinks agw us happening agrees with it.



posted on Sep, 6 2016 @ 03:23 PM
link   
We'll never reduce carbon dioxide emissions at the rate we're going. Too much of the infrastructure needs to be re imagined. Like for example the process of constructing roads.



posted on Sep, 6 2016 @ 03:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: greencmp

No we don't, that is yalls strawman.
You create that ridiculous argument and then act like anyone who thinks agw us happening agrees with it.


Perhaps you've misidentified yourself with the Malthusians which I was impugning.

It cannot be denied that a vast proportion of those who wish to "save the planet" view humanity, not just its energy, as a threat.
edit on 6-9-2016 by greencmp because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 6 2016 @ 03:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: FamCore
a reply to: galien8

They aim to reduce emissions by 80% by 2050, based on the 1990 levels (not present day)



The roadmap suggests that, by 2050, the EU should cut its emissions to 80% below 1990 levels


correct



posted on Sep, 6 2016 @ 03:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: TerryDon79
a reply to: galien8

Where does it point to "80% depopulation"? I see 80% in reference to cut downs, but nothing about depopulation.


100% emissions = by 100% population
80% emissions = by 80% population

GET IT



posted on Sep, 6 2016 @ 03:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: TerryDon79
a reply to: galien8

Where does it point to "80% depopulation"? I see 80% in reference to cut downs, but nothing about depopulation.


100% emissions = by 100% population
80% emissions = by 80% population

GET IT



posted on Sep, 6 2016 @ 03:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: greencmp
a reply to: galien8

Welcome to "the consensus". Seriously, these modern day Malthusians really do want to cull.


Maltheser Knights?



posted on Sep, 6 2016 @ 03:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: galien8

originally posted by: TerryDon79
a reply to: galien8

Where does it point to "80% depopulation"? I see 80% in reference to cut downs, but nothing about depopulation.


100% emissions = by 100% population
80% emissions = by 80% population

GET IT



Well, no, not really how it works.

A 20% reduction in emissions doesn't mean a 20% reduction in people. It means a 20% reduction in emissions.

Let's say (just for ease) that there are 100 cars and they cause 100% total emissions. To reduce emissions to 80% you reduce the amount of cars by 20, not population.



posted on Sep, 6 2016 @ 03:34 PM
link   
a reply to: galien8

No, people (the entire population) have to live cleaner, smarter, have much less waste.



posted on Sep, 6 2016 @ 03:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: galien8

originally posted by: greencmp
a reply to: galien8

Welcome to "the consensus". Seriously, these modern day Malthusians really do want to cull.


Maltheser Knights?

Whim reapers.



posted on Sep, 6 2016 @ 03:35 PM
link   
a reply to: galien8

There are way's but they are initially hugely expensive, while I do believe there is a conspiracy that may not yet be multinational (And the Chinese will NOT play ball) to depopulate the human population of planet and replace the poorest and most numerous people with automation either by Gate's foundation style illegal sterilization or even nationally controlled and enforced (but probably not told to the public) chemical or even medical sterilization once again probably using a similar tactic to the Gate's foundation of hiding the sterilizing agent's within an inoculation and of course culling the population by other mean's such as Biological pathogenic and em wave sterilization method's.

But I don't believe that is how they would try to match this unrealistic target, the removal of the mass of the population is not about climate it is about control.

To reduce Carbon emission's there are two method's, non/low carbon energy and carbon emission trapping.

The latter is in principle like a giant catalytic converter placed on carbon power station's and other major carbon producing sources, of course killing of the cattle and then the population would also work so the neferious element are probably rubbing there hand's together in glee at being given an excuse for there population culling plan's and we have seen that as Jesse Ventura proved and this site knew already for a long time that even in the Continental United State's there are mass storage of huge plastic coffin's that can hold over two dozen body's each and they have perhaps million's of these thing's as well as concentration/fema camp's (so much for democracy in what the rest of the world USED to see as the most democratic nation on earth eh).

Now the Chinese have just ENDED there population control measures and removed the one child state law, they are hoping for a baby boom while the rest of the world are being told that they need to limit population growth but not the Chinese (AKA in preparation for the mass cull) so the end result will be a massively far larger Chinese ethnic group ready to take over the depopulated world - literally.

Don't worry though because when and if they do the top family's behind this control and crime against humanity will be of course be rounded up and executed, every last one of them from the Rockafella's to the House of Hannover and the House of Saud.


Now just to go off subject on a matter I have probed for a while in my own way but maybe just maybe we can get a glimpse of the future of one power player in this affair.

Now without getting into phasing that phantom city that was photographed over china going back was not a UFO, it was not an optical illusion or a reflection as has been argued but it was a probably quantum phasing event triggered by potential future technology's in that region and showed a huge city, if it was the top of building's that will one day be there than China then in the twenty third century look's to have some pretty huge mega city like population bases and guess what they are still here then so are we?.

The way it work's is that you can see a quantum echo from some kind of energy field that is causing light (which has inter dimensional property's) to manifest showing the future city, those are the top's of building's built right over the current city so they are huge, you only get a small aperture because the energy window is small and probably one way not time travel just an echo caused by a future event of some kind.

Ok so if you could build between dimension's you could find an earth that existed in that other dimension were there was a mountain there then build that city upon it and here it would look and behave like a fairy tale city in the cloud's with air craft even being able to fly harmlessly through it (but phase those craft probably they would have to wait in the area for a while and they could then land in that seemingly floating city, such places in a way would serve as inter dimensional terminals and if another version of the human race or someone else has that ability then they may be able to colonies uninhabitated parrallel worlds beside there own (imagine sci fi sliders on steroid's).

The reason I have brought this seeming optical illusion up is that I believe it is not an illusion but is cause by a quantum event or energy leak of some kind in the Future, it is not a parallel reality but this reality or rather an echo of it's future scattering backward in time and there is no evidence, given the size of those seeming building's assuming they are built upon the current surface level give or take a few meter's, of a population reduction in China's future, rather it look's to become very much more populace, immensely so in fact and they seem to be using architecture to house this new population.

Of course I could just be bat s34a crazy but think that this proves they will fail, at least there but it make's me genuinely wonder at out own future and if they succeed here only to be then taken over by that huge resource hungry future China.

Also if I am right about that being a quantum echo then there is no way on earth that they can now change there course as it is a kind of self fulfilling interaction.

What it also mean's is that Carbon emission', war and other factor's have not wiped out the human race by 2267.

edit on 6-9-2016 by LABTECH767 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 6 2016 @ 03:36 PM
link   
a reply to: galien8

Point one, not every country will follow this edict.

Two, the countries that do will have a weakened and vulnerable infrastructure and will be attacked by the countries that didn't adhere to this.

And three, politicians make all sorts of promises they expect us to keep while doing absolutely nothing about it themselves. So they can make all these draconian rules and edicts but they themselves will never follow them.



posted on Sep, 6 2016 @ 03:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: Hazardous1408
This planet is definitely large enough to withstand current numbers.

But I don't think the ideologies prevalent in the modern world are capable of withstanding the current numbers.

Not even my beloved socialism is up to task.


No! Climate change is only one problem, others are that there will not be enough food for 10 billion people in 2050, seas and oceans will be empty of fish, no more wild flora and fauna, large scale agriculture will already have exhausted all resources etc. etc.



posted on Sep, 6 2016 @ 03:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheAmazingYeti
We'll never reduce carbon dioxide emissions at the rate we're going. Too much of the infrastructure needs to be re imagined. Like for example the process of constructing roads.


I concur



posted on Sep, 6 2016 @ 03:46 PM
link   
It's definitely going to happen. Tesla is only getting bigger, more solar companies pop up whenever legislation makes it possible. Battery technology, solar panel technology, electric car technology, wind turbine technology...all keep accelerating and getting better by the month.

This is being driven by the private sector, of course. The only problem is that government keeps trying to stifle it and get in the way.




top topics



 
10
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join